If I was allowed to vote I would. Excellent job using their words against them. That's the way it is done.

/////////////////////////////////
Great minds ... think for themselves.

Just a reminder that you are addressing a creature of the Inner Party. Perino is not just another whore to power; she is the ideal citizen of Oceania.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuWTAgz_NSc&feature=related

That Helen Thomas is the only "journalist" in the room to ask this obvious question is far scarier than the lies of the apologist.

“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson

we have done all of the attacking . . we killed over a million people . . . we started the Iraq War with something we called Shock and Awe which is a terrorist attack by definition.

In the movie "The Control Room", when the bombs started hitting Bagdad, the Al Jezzera reporters stated, "Here comes the democracy".

I get nervous calling in to the radio, when nobody's even looking at me.
You stayed on point, you covered a huge amount of ground, and she partially surrendered.
The bipartisanship stance (hey look.. our criminality was supported by the corrupt opposition, too!) is a fallback position and a deflection.
You're in the game at the highest level and you're playing for keeps. EXCELLENT JOB!!
Did you hear her tone with "does anybody else have a question?". (Somebody throw me a rope, please? Where's Jeff Gannon?)

Truly awesome.

When you get the time, could you give some of us your tips on preparing for such a shining moment?
Much Love,
~Markov

Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
~George Orwell

This is the woman who had no idea what the Cuban Missile Crisis was, and she's telling YOU how to be a good journalist. HA! I also agree there was a vaguely threatening tone to her remarks.

Fantastic job handing her her ass - very nicely done! She appeared right on the edge of panic.

It's almost laughable because it's just so unbelievable. These terrorists have not hit us once since 911?? You think that's because our homeland security is doing such a good job? They don't have to do anything... we have already been sold.

These terrorists are so darn crafty. They are so good at making car bombs... but not once has one gone off here in the US? Not ONCE? These terrorists hate us so much that they are willing to strap bombs to themselves and walk into a crowded place and blow themselves up (with explosives that they got from Iran?)... but NOT ONCE here???

___________________
Together in Truth!

I kept thinking it must be fake. But then she "answered" your questions. It's still a beautiful country when we can get this type of access? How did it occur? This is awesome. She knows we're coming. That's all I can say. And good work on the sources too.

Good job bringing truth to power. I'd like to make a suggestion for the future which I've made to the WeAreChange crowd, as well:

People like Perino are the masters of spin. They are hired precisely because of their ability to deflect controversy. When confronting people like her, it's best to not ask questions that require listing so many background points, most of which are speculation, opinion or interpretation. Rather, pick ONE point and drill it home leaving no room to answer one part of your question while avoiding the meat. Deflectors are always looking for something you say to stray from the main point. The temptation when confronting high-level players is to "support" your argument with as much "damning" info as possible. This only works against you and you're supplying them with a way out of answering your questions.

So, in this case, your final question was, "Why the secrecy?" Characterizing the White House position as being "secretive" is an opinion and/or an interpretation, not a fact and certainly something a secretive cabal is not going to admit. You should assume the response will be as it has always been, "national security," and it will continue to be. In any event, the question is too general. A better question might be:

"The Bush administration refused the Taliban's offer to extradite Bin Ladden (citing date and location, etc) because we had no evidence of his guilt. After seven years, the FBI still has no hard evidence (according to its website, spokesman and even Meuller, himself [citing date and location of quote]) linking al-Qaida or Bin Laden to 9/11. Who else is a possible suspect and shouldn't we have hard evidence before we blame and attack another country?"

By leaving the question simple like this she has to answer you or some part of the question and hence, go on-record for something, which is the best we can hope for to ultimately catch them in a lie. If she is good, she will answer a question you didn't ask, which you have every right to interupt her and get her back on track. She could just not answer the question at all and risk looking "boxed in" as Silverstein did when WAC cornered him, asking, "What was the name of the fire commander you talked to about 'pulling' Building 7?

Keep questions short, simple, direct, fact-based and potent.

Anyway, thanks for your courage and for being respectful in your confrontations. You're a great spokesperson for the students of the movement and for the movement at-large.

That urks me to no end... Neither Justin or myself are what might be considered "rocket scientists", however, we easily put pieces together that the media seemingly can't.